– Sweden had been largely ruled by Social Democrats for decades. After one term of the Modernitska Party, the country decided it deserved an historic second term. The SNP may enjoy that same opportunity.
– The Social Democrats are generally popular but a singularly unpopular leader at the helm was their ultimate undoing at the election. Iain Gray is likeable but his lack of chutzpah may similarly count against him come election day.
– Social Democrats promised to outspend the Modernitska Party, regardless of how much it cost the country. The public never fully bought it. Labour is unrealistically opposing ‘SNP cuts’ at every turn while continuing to propose GARL and a substantial building of new prisons.
– The Social Democrats struggled to decide how to tackle immigration, torn between being pro-immigration on principle or taking a stronger stance to win cheap votes. Labour, no thanks to Phil Woolas, are going through the same turmoil.
– The ruling Modernitska party in Sweden were able to outflank the Social Democrats on both the left and the right. The SNP enjoys that same flexibility across various policy issues.
– The Social Democrats are headed up by a tight clique of former Ministers. Labour is suffering from a lack of fresh blood coming through.
– The Social Democrats were far ahead in the polls for months prior to the election date with the ruling Modernitska party only pulling ahead weeks before the election date. Many predict the same will happen in Scotland.
I, perhaps optimistically, like to think that Scots think along the same latitudinal lines as their similarly-minded Social Democratic Scandinavian friends. Could next year’s Scottish election already be foretold by this year’s Swedish election?
incidentally, the biggest gainers in that Swedish election were…… the Green party.
#1 by Mr. Mxyzptlk on November 12, 2010 - 9:28 pm
Jeff
You been got at aint ya? just a few posts ago you said
Result: Labour/Lib Dem/Green/Socialist ‘Progressive Alliance’
Labour – 48 seats
SNP – 43 seats
which sent a number of the Nationalist into a frenzy and now you concoct a series of unlikely events to placate the
Nationalist…shame on you!! Frit
#2 by Alec on November 14, 2010 - 2:48 pm
The only more unreal application of the p-word for Greens is for a nationalist Party. Labour aint progessive, it’s Labour. The Tories aint progressive, they’re Tories.
In fact, the only Parties with the word in their names which I can think of are/were best avoided.
#3 by Allan on November 12, 2010 - 11:03 pm
Hmmm.. the words straw’s and clutching at spring readily to mind ((c) Angus Deayton 1990).
I suspect that if Scottish Labour clutch defeat from the jaws of victory (another Deaytonism!), it will be down to them shooting themselves in the foot with the Council Tax rise’s more than anything else. Though the point about the lack of new, quality, talent coming through on the Labour ranks is a good one.
(NB: The point about GARL is another good point, more so because i suspect that Labour have miscalculated it’s poularity. However GARL is a rather convenient coathanger to hang the “crime” of being anti-Glasgow/Renfrewshire – and to make it stick with the electorate.)
#4 by James Kelly on November 13, 2010 - 1:07 am
I can’t say I took any satisfaction in the victory of the centre-right in Sweden, Jeff, but nevertheless I hope your analogy holds good. The one obvious difference of course is that, however regrettably, the Scottish elections are bound to be affected by UK-wide politics – ie. Labour have a better chance simply because the Tories are in power at Westminster.
Again, this isn’t a matter of any satisfaction, but I see from Wikipedia that the far-right Sweden Democrats actually made a bigger gain than the Greens, both in terms of votes and seats.
#5 by James on November 13, 2010 - 9:41 am
The Sweden Democrats did get over the threshold for the first time, so won the most seats, but the Greens got up into third place, leapfrogging four other parties to get there.
#6 by Jeff on November 13, 2010 - 6:18 pm
I didn’t take any satisfaction from the result either Stuart.
And I have gambled and lost with my assertion that the Greens were the biggest gainers as I did mean (with fingers crossed) seats/vote share. I’ll jump onboard James’ argument that going from 7th to 3rd and being actually offered concessions makes Greens the biggest ‘winners’ from the election, especially as the Swed Dems are effectively frozen out of any influence.
Anyway, it wasn’t such a serious post all in all to be honest but I’d agree with you that the biggest factor may (may!) be who holds the power down in Westminster.
#7 by Doug Daniel on November 13, 2010 - 1:48 am
“Iain Gray is likeable”
Erm… Really?
Maybe it’s just that his voice really, really grates on me, but I can’t see anything likeable about Iain Gray. Admittedly, I find it hard to like any Scottish Labour MSPs (except Malcolm Chisholm, the one Labour MSP who is capable of rising above petty party squabbling), but I’ve found Gray’s tenure to be a real low point for his party. Opportunism, half-truths, ridiculous accusations and calls for inquiries that have merely served to waste time (and money)… It’s been utter tedium, made worse by the fact that this man – who sounds even less intelligent than George W. Bush (I’ll never understand how he was capable of being a physics teacher in earlier years) – could soon be Scotland’s representative on the global stage. I’d rather have Jack McConnell back – pin-striped kilt in tow – than have people think that Iain Gray is the best Scotland can come up with.
Maybe I’m missing something though. Maybe I’ve missed his startling wit because I’ve been busy seething at one of his ludicrous claims.
#8 by Jeff on November 13, 2010 - 6:04 pm
Or maybe I was just being nice…
His non-political PPB last year seemed genuine and he seemed, well, likeable. That’s not to say that I don’t disagree with many of your politics-related points of course.
#9 by Hamish on November 13, 2010 - 1:05 pm
Allan, you really need to educate yourself if you think Angus D. was the source of the cliches you quote.
And if you don’t know how to use apostrophes: if in doubt, leave them out.
On-topic: Jeff, I had begun to think you had lost interest in what is happening up here.
I too am looking for reasons to be hopeful. Not least the fact that Labour, LibDems, Tories ganged together to vote down the eminently sensible proposals of the SNP to combat Scotland’s collective drink problem.
#10 by Jeff on November 13, 2010 - 4:44 pm
Hamish, I guess it’d always be a struggle to move away from Scotland and be more interested in Scottish politics but I’m definitely feeling it for May ’11 (as recent posts testify). The variance to anyone’s expectation 5 months out is so large that considering either an SNP or Labour win is reasonable with most rationales valid at this early stage.
#11 by neil craig on November 13, 2010 - 3:49 pm
Y thought the big gainers in the Swedish election were the new anti-immigration party – to the horror of the political establishment.
#12 by Jeff on November 13, 2010 - 4:32 pm
The Swed Dems generated the most headlines but they are still the smallest party in the Riksdag, you’d be hard pushed to call them the biggest gainers. In percentage terms maybe since they came from zero but in absolute terms I doubt it.
#13 by Brian Hill on November 13, 2010 - 7:20 pm
We should remember that the SNP’s victory in 2007 is the closest the UK establishment has come to staring Independence in the face. The farce of the combined unionist vote against minimum pricing reminds us that it isn’t just the Labour Party the SNP is up against but the entire UK establishment.
Everything is against the SNP and yet Labour’s best poll result has been 10 points ahead until earlier this month when the SNP had closed to ‘neck and neck’.
May 2011 is still wide open and I think the Swedish parallels ar quite feasable and very interesting. Thanks for pointing them out jeff.
#14 by Jeff on November 14, 2010 - 7:51 pm
No worries Brian. Your point raises a further point though in that – ‘At what tipping point does this flat-out rejection of all things SNP-related start to get noticed by the public at large and lead to a situation where the harder the unionist entities (in all their various forms) push against independence/SNP, the stronger the rallying behind the underdog ‘Nats’ become?’
That may be fanciful and/or delusional on my part but if the media really goes for it in a shrill pro-Labour, anti-SNP way, we may see that tipping point come before May ’11.
#15 by tom on November 13, 2010 - 7:50 pm
whats the media like in Sweden compared to Scotland?
#16 by Jeff on November 14, 2010 - 7:47 pm
Tom, fine question. From what I can tell the media in Sweden is more respected, intellectually-driven, better balanced and involves a wider selection of publications than what Scotland is stuck with. Dagens Nyheter is pick of the bunch for me and while the Sunday Herald can sometimes measure up, I still think Scotland is way short of where it should be in terms of mainstream news/analysis and I find that my regular visits to Sweden reinforce that view…
#17 by Indy on November 14, 2010 - 11:13 am
The parallel falls down in comparing Labour to the Social Democrats.
If we look at Labour’s crime agenda, for example, or their opposition to regulating the workings of the free market when it comes to alcohol, or indeed some of their anti-immigration rhetoric (and the almost unbelievable willingness of Labour MPs to support the disgraceful behaviour of Phil Woolas) Labour’s claim to be a social democratic party is based on somewhat dodgy foundations.
#18 by Alec on November 14, 2010 - 2:54 pm
Would, keeping the Sweden analogy going, that not make them more likely to be elected in 2011?
As with Switzerland, the famed egalitarianism and social care in Sweden has largely been based on the ethnic/cultural homogeneity and nativist desire to look after their own. This aint to say non-Europeans were accepted, especially in the urban areas, but now there’s the feeling they should be seen to be contributing rather than acquiring refugee/asylum status.
#19 by Jeff on November 14, 2010 - 7:42 pm
It’s a fair objection Indy, should I even be considering Labour as Scotland’s de-facto Social Democrat party? Quite possibly not and you’ve outlined a few good reasons as to why…
#20 by Andrew McPake on November 14, 2010 - 11:40 am
Jeff, do you realise you have just drawn a parallel between the SNP and another nation’s centre-right party? Is this how you perceive the difference between the SNP and Labour?
The Modernitska Party are in the process of dismantling what was at one time the world’s most successful social democracy. If this is the agenda you see the SNP pursuing then most Scots will reject the party.
Indy is correct to say that Labour is far from a social democratic party. However, the majority of Scots persist with the delusion that they are; this is why, in Scotland, they enjoyed such a strong showing at the General Election.
If the SNP and its supporters view centre-right parties in other nations as their equivalents it does nothing to challenge Labour’s pretences of progressive thinking.
#21 by Jeff on November 14, 2010 - 7:36 pm
Andrew,
I was solely comparing the Labour party in Scotland with the Social Democrats in Sweden, and being cheekily selective with it too. That doesn’t mean I was comparing the Moderates with the SNP just because they happen to be the ruling parties. By extension, that would mean I was comparing the Swedish Green Party with the Scottish Tories (3rd party in each country) and comparing the 6th parties would be likening the allegeldy racist Swedish Democrats with the Scottish Senior Citizens Party. Both pretty ridiculous I’m sure you’ll agree.
My outlandishness here leads to my overriding point is – don’t take any of the direct or indirect linkages in this post too literally or too seriously…
(Although, now you mention it, just because the Moderates are perceived to be to the right of the Socfial Democrats, I don’t know if I would necessarily paint them as to the right of the UK’s perceived left-wing parties, be it Labour, SNP, Lib Dems or whoever. The Moderates are not in favour of reducing Sweden’s very high income tax rates as one example. But that is a discussion that is way beyond me and my very basic knowledge of Swedish (and UK!) politics…)
#22 by Neil on November 14, 2010 - 2:45 pm
As Tom hints at above, you don’t seem to have made any allowance for the total hostility of the media in Scotland to the SNP (and their almost total unthinking support for Labour).
The SNP is facing a massive uphill struggle which I am guessing the Swedish party did not have to deal with; how to get fair coverage from at least some portion of the media.
#23 by Jeff on November 14, 2010 - 7:41 pm
Neil, true enough, I haven’t made such an allowance. However, this wasn’t meant to be a catch-all post about the factors for the 2011 election, of which media coverage will be a leading one. Indeed, the Social Democrats are treated fairly but not, as far as I can tell, as favourites by the media in Sweden. Given that, I couldn’t see how I could make ‘media’ an 8th similarity with Labour in Scotland…
So you’re right, the media in Scotland does seem to be a problem but that is a separate discussion and a separate consideration to this post which was really only meant to be a bit of a light Friday one.
#24 by neil craig on November 14, 2010 - 3:28 pm
Indy if the term “progressive” it can only apply to those who support human progress. Obviously therefore the Greens can never ba associated with any honestly progressive movement & with the SNP’s commitment to windmillery & destroying half the scots economy, neither can they.
#25 by Brian Hill on November 14, 2010 - 8:04 pm
“So you’re right, the media in Scotland does seem to be a problem….”
I would think that statement will be a contender for understatement of the decade in about 9 years time.
#26 by Callum on November 14, 2010 - 8:28 pm
NEIL CRAIG – Windmills are making the most of one of the country’s natural resourses – they are clean and sustainable, so I’m not sure what your beef is about.
With regards to the SNPs commitment of “destroying half the scots economy” – how can this be possible when the Scottish Government has no economic powers and thus NO control of the economy.
You may be biased in your views on the SNP, however when there is no substance in your argument, it only serves to support the opposing standpoint.
Silly boy.
#27 by Indy on November 15, 2010 - 1:29 pm
Oh dear.
#28 by Malc on November 15, 2010 - 1:45 pm
Indeed. Guys – I think we’re done with the Nazi chat. Its fairly off-topic – can we move on?
#29 by James on November 15, 2010 - 3:17 pm
Comments are closed! Thanks for all the potentially libellous stuff we’ve deleted!